Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Adil Noshir Mithaiwala Double Jeopardy and Abuse of Process Cited in Landmark Judgment
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the criminal proceedings against Adil Noshir Mithaiwala, citing double jeopardy and abuse of process of law. The judgment was delivered by Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma on November 13, 2025, in connection with Criminal Appeal Nos. 627 and 628 of 2017.
The case revolved around charges of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and falsification of accounts under Sections 420, 406, 408, 409, and 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Sections 120-B and 34. The proceedings were initiated in India by M/s Asia Exchange Centre, a firm registered in the United Arab Emirates, through its Power of Attorney holder, Anees Aravindakshan.
The crux of the issue was whether the proceedings under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could be sustained when the same matter had already been adjudicated by civil and criminal courts in the UAE, and had attained finality. The Supreme Court held that continuing such proceedings in India amounted to double jeopardy, as the complainant had already invoked both civil and criminal jurisdiction in the UAE, which resulted in the dismissal of their complaint and civil suit.
Emphasizing the abuse of process, the Court noted that the complainant's failure to disclose the dismissal of earlier proceedings in the UAE was a crucial factor. Justice Sundresh, while delivering the judgment, stated, "Continuing the criminal proceedings against the appellants would be an abuse of process of law as certainly, it would amount to double jeopardy."
Furthermore, the judgment highlighted the legal principle that an agent cannot depose in favor of the principal on matters within the exclusive knowledge of the latter. This principle was reinforced by referencing a previous ruling in 'M/s Naresh Potteries v. M/s Aarti Industries'.
The Supreme Court's decision to quash the proceedings underscores its commitment to ensuring the fair application of justice and preventing the misuse of legal processes. The judgment sends a strong message against the initiation of legal proceedings in India on matters already decided in foreign jurisdictions, thereby preventing unnecessary harassment and legal entanglements.
With this ruling, the appeals have been allowed, and any pending applications stand disposed of, bringing relief to Adil Noshir Mithaiwala and setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.
Bottom Line:
Criminal proceedings initiated in India on the same issue previously adjudicated in foreign courts (both civil and criminal) and attained finality amounts to an abuse of process of law and double jeopardy.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code Sections 420, 406, 408, 409, 477A, 120-B, 34; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 200; Evidence Act, 1872.
Adil Noshir Mithaiwala v. State of Uttar Pradesh., (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2821621
